Negligence (Caparo Industries v Dickman)
0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
Learn
Practice Test
Spaced Repetition
Match
FlashcardsCard Sorting
1/3
There's no tags or description
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Study Analytics
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
4 Terms
1
New cards
Harm reasonably foreseeable
Kent v Griffiths- Was reasonably foreseeable as late amvulance = harm
2
New cards
Fair, Just, and Reasonable
Hill v CC of West Yorkshire- NOT reasonable as it would ‘open the floodgates’
Robinson- Doesn’t owe a D.O.C to public when preventing crime
3
New cards
Sufficient Proximity between C+D
Osman v Ferguson- WAS as police was aware of potential danger
Bourhill v Young- NO link to motorcyclist
4
New cards
Neighbour Priciple
must take reasonable steps to avoid acts/omissions which reasonably foreseeably might injure your neigbour
Lord Atkin- any person who is closely + directly affected by acts/omissions
Note 
Flashcards (102)